Can polyp detection rate be used prospectively as a marker of adenoma detection rate?

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality indicator for screening colonoscopy, but its calculation is time-consuming. Polyp detection rate (PDR) has been found to correlate with ADR; however, its use as a quality indicator has been criticized out of concern for endoscopists artificially inflating the PDR. We aim to evaluate whether active monitoring affects PDR. METHODS: In March 2015, 14 endoscopists were made aware that their personal PDRs would be tracked monthly as a quality improvement project. Endoscopists received a report of their individual monthly and cumulative PDR, departmental averages, and a benchmark PDR. Following the intervention, data were collected for consecutive patients undergoing average risk screening colonoscopy for six months. PDR, ADR, and adenoma to polyp detection ratio quotient (APDRQ) were compared to a six-month pre-intervention period. RESULTS: 2203 patients were included in the study. There was no statistically significant difference in PDR when comparing pre- and post-intervention (44 vs. 45%, OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.77-1.36). No statistically significant difference in ADR was observed when comparing pre- and post-intervention (29 vs. 30%, OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.64-1.52). There was no statistically significant difference in APDRQ when comparing pre- and post-intervention (0.67 vs. 0.66, OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.69-1.33). CONCLUSIONS: Monthly report cards did not result in a change in PDR or APDRQ. In some environments, PDR can be used as a surrogate marker of ADR, despite endoscopist awareness that PDR is being measured.

Upper esophageal sphincter abnormalities and high-resolution esophageal manometry findings in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux.

BACKGROUND: The association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and abnormalities of upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and esophageal motility is not clearly known. High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) has allowed accurate measurement and evaluation of UES and esophageal function. GOALS: To evaluate the UES function and esophageal motility using HREM in patients with LPR and compare them to patients with typical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). STUDY: All patients evaluated for GERD or LPR symptoms with esophageal function testing including HREM, ambulatory distal pH monitoring and upper endoscopy between 2006 and 2014 were retrospectively studied (n = 220). The study group (group A, n = 57) consisted of patients diagnosed with LPR after comprehensive evaluation. They were compared to patients who had typical GERD symptoms only (group B, n = 98) and patients with both GERD and LPR symptoms (group C, n = 65). RESULTS: Abnormalities in UES pressures and relaxation were found in about one-third of patients in all groups. There were no significant differences between the groups. Group B had higher prevalence of abnormal esophageal motility compared to others (group A vs. B vs. C = 20.8% vs. 28% vs. 12.5%, p = .029). Group B patients also had higher prevalence of Barrett's esophagus compared to others (group A vs. B vs. C = 0% vs.12.2% vs. 4.6%, p = .01). Distal pH testing revealed no significant differences between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal UES function was noted in one-third of patients with LPR or GERD. However, there were no abnormalities on esophageal function testing specific for LPR.

Racial Disparity in the Sex Distribution, the Prevalence, and the Incidence of Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus.

GOALS: Our aim was to study the prevalence of dysplasia and progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in African Americans (AA) with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and compare it with that of non-Hispanic white (NHW) controls. BACKGROUND: BE, a precursor of EAC, is a disease of predominantly white men and is uncommon in AA. The prevalence of dysplasia and progression to HGD and EAC in AA patients with BE is not clearly known. STUDY: All AA or NHW patients with confirmed BE, that is specialized intestinal metaplasia, seen between 2002 and 2013 at our institution were included. Variables such as age, gender, medication use, the body mass index, the date of endoscopy, the hiatal hernia size, the BE length, and histologic findings were noted. Progression to HGD/EAC was evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-two AA and 2394 NHW patients with BE were identified. There was a higher percentage of women in the AA cohort (46.2%) than in the NHW cohort (24.9%, P<0.001). Nondysplastic BE was more prevalent in AA than in NHW (80.8% vs. 68.4%, P=0.058). In the surveillance cohort of 20 AA and 991 NHW, no racial differences in progression to HGD/EAC were observed during a median follow-up of 43 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study includes the largest number of AA with histologically confirmed BE reported so far. About 46.2% of the AA cohort with BE in our study consisted of women. There was a trend toward a higher prevalence of nondysplastic BE in AA compared with NHW.